INTRODUCTION
PRIORITIES
WHAT ABOUT FIT?
WHAT PARTS ARE IMPORTANT
FRAME MATERIALS
WHEELSIZE
BUYING FROM AN LBS
BUYING MAIL ORDER
GUARANTEES AND WARRANTIES
WHY BIKE-INDUSTRY ACUMEN IS IN SHORT SUPPLY


How much money will I have to pay you to keep you off your bike for the next four weeks? $500? $5000? Because we must use an example let's use $1500. But to keep you in the spirit, before you read further, stop, think about this question, and come to your own answer.

How many hours per week will you ride this month? Not knowing any better, I'll choose 7.5 hours. (Again, though, pick the number that corresponds to you.) That's $1500 worth of value for 30 hours worth of riding. This works out to $50 per hour.

If this is you, then you've put a value of $50-per-hour on your riding time. I didn't put this value on your riding time. You did.

Now, let's say you're in the market for a new bike. How long will you expect to have this new machine of yours before you buy again? Let's be fair, now. Don't say 5-years if we all know that -- although you could ride it for 5-years -- you'll succumb to the new-bike-itch year after next. Let's say 3-years.

Furthermore, let us say that you only ride these 30-hours-a-week for 36-weeks a year, and let's assume that the other 16-weeks you're taking an off-season, or you're injured, or you've briefly fallen off the wagon.

According to my math, you're investing $50 times 7.5-weekly-hours times 36-weeks times 3-years. That's a shade over $40,000, and that's the value you've put on the time you intend to spend on your next bike during its life.

Keep this in mind the next time you go bike-shopping.

Riding your bike isn't about transportation. It's about being transported. People apply a bad set of standards when choosing a bike, I often find. Shopping for bikes is an awful lot like shopping for books. Or it ought to be. It's a lot like shopping for a book. It isn't about features. It's about the quality of experience that you, yourself, value so very highly. It's not the quality of the paper. It's about the quality of what's on the paper.

People apply a bad set of standards when choosing a bike, I often find. In order to give you perhaps a different approach to this experience, over the next several days I'll write articles describing different aspects of the bike buying experience: what I look for in a bike; what my set of priorities are; how I know that I've made a good choice; and how to guard against getting stuck with a bad choice.

I recently went book shopping, and I left Barnes and Noble with Wallace Stegner's, Thomas Pynchon's, and Don DeLillo's best efforts (and a book on Perl programming I intend to thoroughly hate). If I write this series well, if my advice is any good, your next bike purchaes will be a Hemingway.

PRIORITIES

Perhaps Slowtwitch readers can help me. I'm buying a new car, and I've narrowed it down to a Dodge Ram Longbed 4X4 and a Volvo station wagon. Does that sound reasonable to you?

Probably not. But that's what some of you sound like when you tell me which two or three bikes you're considering for your next purchase. For example, if you're thinking about a Trek OCLV or a Cervelo P2K -- and I hear this sort of thing often -- I have to wonder what criteria you are using for your next bike. In fact, I wonder if you've identified any meaningful criteria for yourself at all.

So what is important to you? Let's stay away from price for a moment. There are other issues I think are germaine, and which are available at a variety of price points.

Comfort and fit are the most frequently mentioned problems that need to be solved, according to the responses we've gotten on our Slowtwitch Bike Picker. These are almost entirely issues of geometry. There is nothing all that uncomfortable, for example, about aluminum. What's uncomfortable is how you fit over an aluminum bike, if you're not on a bike with good geometry.

So what is good geometry? That depends on how you approach the next "problem," which is comfort. Those who've been reading Slowtwitch carefully during the last month will notice a couple of articles by John Cobb, who is now experimenting with a rearward sitting position. If you parse his comments -- and in these articles you can sense that Cobb is feeling his way along this subject -- the problem Cobb appears to be trying to solve is how to generate power, while not losing an aerodynamic advantage, while regaining a measure of comfort. Cobb is a big guy, and he senses in both his own case, and in the case of some of his customers, a specific need for comfort on the saddle. So he's experimenting with moving back to what is essentially not unlike a road racer's position for triathlon racing.

My own thinking on geometry has evolved over the years. I used to think there was the road position, and the tri position, and that they were two distinct, unconnected, disparate positions having nothing in common with each other. I guess I still believe this -- in the ideal case -- but I also recognize that not everyone is an ideal case. Therefore there is a gradient, I think, or a continuum, where comfort is on one side of the continuum and maximum efficiency is on the other side. 78- to 80-degrees is where you ought to be (in my view) if you have no substantial insoluble problem with your tender, nether regions while in the aero position on a bike of that geometry. To the degree that such a problem exists, perhaps you need to move the seat back.

The continuum pits seat angle against top tube and head tube lengths, both of which get longer as the seat tube gets shallower. It's like this: The more you move the seat back the longer the head tube has to be (because if you keep the head tube short your bars will be low, hence your hip-angle will be too acute), and the longer your top tube must be (so that you don't have a clearance problem with the knees hitting the backs of the armrests). But, if your top tube is longer, your aero bar must be shorter, so that you preserve the 90-degree angle between your upper arm and torso.

The other end of the continuum is a shallow seat angle, taller head tube, and mini-aero bar (i.e., you're riding a road race bike with a Spinaci -- or similar -- aero bar).

You need to decide where along that continuum you want to be. A Trek Hilo is fully tri-specific. A Trek OCLV is fully road-specific. Airborne's new Spectre is an example of a bike midway along the continuum. My road bike, for example, has a 17cm head tube, my tri bike (59cm) has a 12cm head tube, and the 58cm Spectre has a 15.5cm head tube (still a bit tall, in my estimate). The Spectre has a 75-degree seat angle as opposed to my tri bike's 78-degrees and my road bike's 73.5-degrees. It's top tube is 57cm, my bikes have 55.5cm (tri) and 59.5cm (road). So the Spectre might be a wise choice for a person looking for a durable, no-rust tri bike in a moderate price-point with only a moderately aggressive approach to speed and aerodynamics.

That said, a problem with a bike like the Spectre might be choosing exactly what to outfit it with: road bar and STI; pursuit bar; how long should the clip-ons be, if they must be shorter than on a 78-degree bike, but longer than on a road race bike?

This is where you have to think about the next issue, which also exists along a continuum: How much can you determine, on your own, the decisions regarding parts choices? This brings us back to comfort, but of a different sort. How comfortable are you that you've got a dealer who is going to take back parts that don't fit well in exchange for parts that do?

This is closely related to another issue: How handy are you? Are you liable to mitre your carbon steer tube too short? Or crush it by clamping down the stem on the steerer without first adequately installing a mechanism on the inside of the steerer to guard against crushing it? Be careful of buying a bike mail order on which you're not equipped to perform service and maintenance, unless you've got a very good mechanic at your beck and call.

How much do you travel with your bike? How easy is it to disassemble and transport? Do you live in an area which has a high salt content in the air? Then you need titanium. Are you the sort that is prone to scratch the paint? Again, buy titanium, or consider a powder coated frame instead of a painted one.

Notice we've not yet talked about frame materials. Imagine, all this time and we haven't gotten to the issue that is often number-one on your list of must-haves. This ought to tell you how inconsequential that feature really is.

Oh, and I got the Dodge Ram. Never considered the Volvo.

WHAT ABOUT FIT?

I don't need to tell you that bike fit is important. We spend an inordinate amount of time on the subject here at Slowtwitch, and we're going to preach it from the pulpit until everybody gets up out of their seat and strolls forward in acceptance. Fit is half of what will make you like your not like your bike riding experience. Everything else combined represents the other half.

People fall in love with bikes for stylistic reasons. Perhaps the most obvious example is Kestrel. This company makes a beautiful, and beautifully functional, tri bike: the KM40 Airfoil. But it only makes it in two sizes. Why is this? Because Kestrel feels only two sizes are necessary? No. If it felt this way it wouldn't make its road race bikes in six or seven sizes. It makes two sizes of KM40 because each of these molds cost in excess of $75,000 to make, and Kestrel makes a new size when it can afford to make one.

So, the question is, will either of these KM40 sizes fit you? I'm not going to go into the question of who these frames will fit, simply that you need to make sure one of them will fit you before you fall in love with the bike.

Which brings up another, qualitative, point -- and I don't mean to sound too preachy -- but this purchase shouldn't be about anticipating a particular thing, but about a riding experience. Rather than fantasizing about something carbon, or something midnight blue, or something with fancy wheels, fantasize about how you'll ideally feel on the bike. That will lead you to covet those qualities in a bike that are important.

WHAT PARTS ARE IMPORTANT

People get way too hung up on the brand names of parts, and where in the pecking order a certain part lays in a manufacturer's cost stratum. The big issue isn't Dura Ace versus Ultegra. You'll never feel the difference, and you'll probably not, in your bike's lifetime, experience the functional drop-off of Ultegra versus the decline of an analogous Dura Ace part. In other words, yes, DA lasts longer than Ultegra. But you'll probably never live to see your Ultegra part die. Buy Dura Ace if you can afford it, but not at the expense of more important stuff.

What is the important stuff? For me, the most important parts are any that come directly, or almost directly, into contact with my body. Therefore, I am ultra-picky about saddle, seat pad, tires, handlebars, aero bars, shifters, handlebar tape, cycling shoes, cycling shorts, cycling jersey, helmet, and brake levers.

I couldn't care less whether my seat post cost $8 or $80, so long as it is sufficiently adjustable and geometrically correct. But don't give me the wrong handlebar tape.

You might think I've become intellectually sloppy by straying off-topic -- from things that go on the bike to bike accessories -- but I've done so to make a point. Don't sweat the small stuff. Don't major in the minors. It's not important how hoity-toity your headset is. A good seat pad will make much more difference to you (and your butt) than whether your headset is Dia Compe or Chris King, or even whether your bike is titanium or aluminum. An unergonomic handlebar, or a malformed armrest, will be much more annoying than shifting with 105 instead of Dura Ace.

I slipped tires into the list, and it doesn't really belong there considering the way I grouped the list contents. But this is one item about which I'm very picky because in a strange way this is almost like a part of the bike that touches you. No, it doesn't touch you -- something's very wrong if it does -- but it is the part of the bike-rider complex that touches the road, and how it interacts with the road is important to me.

No, I'm not listing the parts I think you ought to buy by brand or model. That's not my place. Your arms, butt, and feet, are going to contact your bike, not mine. My point is, value the right things. Honor the right choices. Be wise enough to realize that whatever color your bike is will not mean anything to you a month after you make your purchase. Paint is only skin deep, but a bad saddle is to the bone.

FRAME MATERIALS

I'd like to backtrack to the issue of falling in love with the stylistic features of a bike, and I'm sorry if I'm about to pop a bubble or two, but I'd like to bring up a specific model: the Seven Odonata. This bike is expertly built, perfectly straight, artistically welded, it is in every way a work of art and science (as are all Seven's titanium bikes). Then they put carbon seatstays in it.

I think I know why they did it. Intuitively it makes sense, in a strange sort of way. We like two carbon tubes parallel to each other sticking forward in our bikes, why not the same in the back? But there are real differences between the two concepts. Forks have offset (rake), and there is also some degree of flex -- or compliance -- that occurs along the steerer tube inside the head tube, between the two headset bearings. The seatstays, on the other hand, are only in compression. There is no other significant load applied to them. Carbon is a great material for forks, because you can vary the thickness and direction of carbon fabric to counteract various forces applied across difference axes. Seatstays do not need nearly this much attention. They have two jobs: to keep the chainstays from breaking; and to sit there and look pretty. Seven has focused on this second feature while designing the Odonata.

What are you saying to me, Seven? That carbon is a better frame material than titanium for seatstays? Why? More compliant? More shock absorbing? If so, why should somebody buy a titanium bike at all? Why not just buy a Kestrel?

Carbon seatstays in a titanium bike is a gimmick. That's my view. The only difference you'll notice is the money you'll spend when the glue fails, some years down the road.

Here is the straight poop: All the frame materials work beautifully. Titanium's chief benefit is not its ride quality, but its durability. Unless you paint it, its paint won't scratch. It'll never rust. It's hard to dent. Therfore, if you travel a lot; if you live in a place with salty air; if you're hard on your bike; if you tend to sweat all over your top tube; get a titanium bike.

Aluminum and carbon are lightweight. Carbon is somewhat more compliant, but be careful here, because frames don't -- generally speaking -- have compliance in a vertical plane. There's really very little difference in how comfortable one frame is from another (but there is some). The nice thing about these two frame materials -- carbon especially - is that they are much more flexible and maleable as frame materials, from the builder's point of view. Look at some of the very artsy, aero carbon frames, like the Cheetah or the Lotus. You can't do that with titanium. The downside of that is that these are expensive molds to make, so carbon bikes often suffer from a lack of available sizes.

Steel, well, if it were invented today every builder would be rushing out to build bikes with it. It's a fabulous frame material. Okay, it's a little heavier. But steel bikes ride great, and the materials are pretty easy to work with.

One of the reasons steel gives you a nice ride -- at least this is my opinion -- is that steel tubes are of a smaller diameter. I think tubing diameters make up most of whatever difference there is between one frame's comfort versus another. I have a steel bike that has a 1 1/8" downtube and a 1" top tube. It rides absolutely beautifully. Of course the frame is 7-pounds. So there are trade-offs.

If you're choosing a frame material because you think it's going to be more comfortable, I really think you ought to think that over. Carbon bikes can be no more comfy, complaint, shock absorbing, than aluminum bikes. They can also be no more aero, either. Pay attention to some of the data out there on aero bikes. John Cobb's Bicycle Sports is a good place to start.

As you know by now, fit is very important. So be careful with carbon, make sure the bike fits you before you fall in love with this frame material. If you want a truly aero bike, carbon might be the way to go, but fit is more important than frame aerodynamics. The benefits of titanium are outlined above. Aluminum has three virtues: it is cheap, it is light, and it is easy to work with. So aluminum frame builders are going to have a lot of flexibility in building you just exactly the bike you want, from a fit and features perspective. You can build a more aero bike more easily out of aluminum than titanium, but it's not as durable over the long haul.

Steel, well, it's a great material, but it's not particularly light, it's not much more durable than aluminum, and it's not going to yield the most aero frame design. Steel is the utility infielder of frame materials. It finishes second or third in every category. No sex appeal here. Funny thing, though, my wife, who is retired from triathlon now, yet still holds Ironman bike course records, recently reminisced to me that the fastest she ever went on a bike was when she was riding steel. Those were her favorite bikes. Go figure.

WHEEL SIZE

At 5'10" to 5'11" tall you can go either way. If you're taller than that, 700c is probably better, shorter, 650c is probably better. Your consideration ought to be, at least in part, how low do your bars need to be?

You can achieve a low position with 700c wheels, even if you're 5'10" or shorter. The problem is, you have less adjustability available to you in the form of a flippable stem. What I mean is, if you want to take the maximum advantage available to you through having a stem which works with a threadless headset and also has a two-piece faceplate, you must pay attention to your head tube height. Prior to the advent of threadless (Aheadset-style) headsets, you couldn't flip a stem upside down. But what REALLY made this easy was a removable faceplate. Now, with a stem that's 5- or 6-degrees from 90-degrees (up or down), you get something inbetween 10mm and 15mm of rise-fall by flipping the stem (with the 6-degree stem on my bike I lower my bars exactly 15mm when I flip it from 96-degrees to 84-degrees.

The shorter you are, the more you'll need a 650c bike to get the top of the head tube low enough to the ground so as to utilize this strategy. But, if you're shorter you can still get your bars low enough to the ground with a 700c bike -- you'll just have to use a stem with a more severe drop, and you won't be able to flip it (if you did, you'd have a severe rise, which won't be of any help to you). This means that if you do opt for 700c wheels, you ought to give yourself more room for spacers -- and the adjustability they accommodate -- than you'd need with 650c. With 650c, you could mitre your steer column such that you'd have only, say, 15mm to 25mm of spacers. This is because the 15mm you get via the ability to flip your stem makes a total of 30mm to 40mm of adjustability (25mm of spacers plus 15mm by flipping the stem). You don't get this if you have a stem with a severe drop. So if you're shorter, and you want to use 700c wheels, until you're sure what your final bar position will be you ought to leave yourself 35mm or so of extra steerer length and spacers, in order to have enough adjustability.

The next issue favoring 650c for shorter guys and gals is toe-clip-overlap. We don't use toe-clips anymore, but we still call it that. If you're shorter than 5'10" tall you're going to have 53cm of top tube length or less. I'd want to make sure you don't have an issue with the back of the front wheel clipping the front of your foot when you're turning while pedaling. Women have desperate problems with this, and because tri bikes have shorter top tubes than road bikes, triathletes with tri-specific bikes can have this issue as well. A 650c front wheel solves this problem.

The third issue is weight displacement front-to-rear. You've got a lot of weight over the front wheel with a tri bike, and a shorter chainstay helps to minimize this effect, by drawing the rear wheel back underneath your butt. You can do this with a 650c wheel, less so with 700c. Why isn't this so much an issue with taller guys? Because even with a steep-seat-angled bike you still have your butt further and further behind the bottom bracket as the bike gets bigger. Remember, it's 78-degrees, not 90-degrees. So, taking myself as an example, at 6'2" the nose of my saddle is right at, or slightly behind, the bottom bracket on my tri bike. A shorter person's saddle nose is likely to be 15mm to 25mm in front -- ergo, more of your weight is over the front of the bike, and you need a shorter chainstay.

The value of 700c is in the ability to have ubiquitous wheels, tires, tubes, swapping back and forth with your road bike -- assuming your road bike is 700c, which it is more often than not. Also, since a 650c bike is lightweight, you'll notice, at least slightly, the better ability for a 650c bike to accelerate, and the more quickly it loses its inertia. "Offsetting penalties," as they say on Sunday morning TV. It's just an issue of getting used to it. 650c-wheel bikes feel slightly quicker, 700c-wheel bikes feel slightly smoother.

Finally, 700c bikes are slightly more comfortable, and perhaps slightly faster, on rough roads. They roll over imperfections better. This is going to be an issue, or it isn't, depending on where you train and race. I used to do a lot of riding in Germany, with Jurgen Zack and the guys in the Koblenz area. We used to ride 650c a lot, and Jurgen has ridden 650c for about a decade. But the roads in Koblenz, and throughout Germany, are like glass. New Zealand, on the other hand, has rougher chip-and-seal surfaces. So, one might be more likely to ride 650c in Germany than in New Zealand, all other things equal.

BUYING FROM AN LBS

"LBS." Translation: Local Bike Shop. This is a touchy subject, because people have strong feelings about such things as loyalty, supporting local economies, and stuff like that. I, on the other hand, know that the largest margin dollars (by far) in the bike-sale transaction is earned by the shop selling the bike to the end user, and I feel equally strongly that such dollars are not earned by proximity, but by professionalism.

All these strong feelings aside, there is the question of what is best for you, and that means -- much of the time -- you've got to ditch the LBS in favor of a more knowledgeable shop. But how do you know how much your LBS knows?

For starters, one would hope it knows more than you. Otherwise, why should it earn the margin? Let me put this in hard numbers. In the sale of a $1500 bike, your LBS will earn about $500, perhaps as much as $600 (at the outside). What is it doing to earn this money? Plenty, and here is my breakdown, with dollar amounts attached.

• Explaining bike options to you prior to the sale ($50)
• Flooring the bike(s) you want to see ($85)
• Giving you test rides on various bikes ($115)
• Acting as a destination receiver for the bike, if it must be shipped ($25)
• Taking the bike out of the box and assembling it. ($75)
• Fitting you to it ($100)
• Having fitting equipment on hand (e.g., fit bikes) to more easily fit you ($50)
• Having on hand various parts (e.g., extra stems) to better fit you ($75)

All that adds up to $600, and I think if a dealer provides all the above he's earned his margin, and you ought not to begrudge him the money he's earned. But sadly, even many "tri shops" don't have any equipment for properly fitting you, nor even sound expertise.

I guess the most brutal way to put it is that you, as a reader of the articles contained herein, will enter a shop with a certain degree of knowledge, and if the knowledge base of your LBS doesn't rise to the level of your own, why are you giving away margin dollars? Your LBS might argue that, hey, if you want a local shop to do service when you need it, and perform all the LBS functions, you've got to support it when it comes time to buy the new bike. I'm not swayed by such arguments. All the functions of an LBS are portable. It makes money doing service. If it performs service well, it will earn your service patronage. If it wants the new bike business, it's got to earn that, and that means gaining expertise and making investments on all elements of the new bike purchase.

So, if it was me, I'd judge the LBS by how it performs the above services. For example, if there are no bikes that you might want at your LBS' location -- if the LBS didn't undertake the risk of flooring these bikes -- then why should it be awarded a full margin? If there are no bikes to test ride, again, what is your LBS doing to earn its money? Now, hey, don't get me wrong, there is a lot more that the LBS does. That is why I've broken the costs out above. If it is placing a phone call to order a pro bike for you because it stocks no -- or almost no -- pro bikes, fine. As long as it performs all the other stuff in a proper fashion, it ought to earn $400 on the $1500 sale instead of $600. That's how I work the math out.

LBS owners really get the hair up on their backs when I talk this way. But look at this from the flip side. Bicycles Sports in Shreveport has had more than a thousand expensive carbon race wheels in its inventory at various times in its history. Mission Bay has had 5000-square-feet of bikes, wall to wall, in stock, as well as 400 wetsuits, or more. Go into Nytro and you'll see more pro triathlon bikes than are contained in all the bike shops of all the Great Plains states combined. Same sort of thing with Kalifornia Kool Stuff, Belmont Wheelworks, Landis Bike Shop, Inside Out sports, Bonzai Bikes, and dozen more fabulous shops I could name. All these shops earn their margins. Your LBS may or may not earn it, and I am not interested in interfering with a good relationship. But it's your money we're talking about. If it was my money, I'd make sure my LBS was earning it, or I'd purchase my new tri-bike elsewhere.

So, again, how do you know whether your LBS -- or another shop you might query -- is knowledgeable? I guess I'd ask them a few questions. I'd ask:

• How do you execute tri-bike fitting?
• Do you have a fit bike that you use, specific for triathletes?
• What pro bikes do you have on the floor, or in stock -- not are you are able to acquire, but what bikes will I see on the floor if I come visit? (If this shop really traffics in pro bikes it'll want and need to have an inventory of such bikes).

Furthermore, I would:

• Ask about road bar/STI vs pursuit bar/bar-end shift set-ups -- see if you like the answers you get; see if they're reasonable answers.
• Ask about steep seat angles vs shallow; 650c wheels vs 700c; Syntace vs Profile; Rolf vs Hed, or Zipp, or Corima.
• Call or email the manufacturer of the bike(s) you're interested in. Ask where you should buy the bike. Press the manufacturer on this. Tell it you don't want to know where the closest shop is that carries their bikes, but which is the best shop in the area. Ask why it's the best.

But let's back up for a minute. Triathlon, and tri-specific bikes, are a real specialty. Plenty of LBS's just aren't going to be that knowledgeable about triathlon, and that doesn't mean the shop is a bad one, just that sales and service of pro tri-bikes may not be its mission, or its core mission. Perhaps that's okay for you. Specifically, what if you really ought not to have a tri bike, but a road race bike? (see our Bike Picker for such an explanation). In that case, your LBS may be a great place to buy a bike, if you ought to be on a Giant TCR2, or a Trek OCLV, or a Bianchi, or a LeMond.

But if it's a tri bike you're after, I recommend the brutul approach. It's not only your money we're talking about, but many hours of your leisure time. It's not just about trusting a shop with $1500 or $2000 of your hard-earned cash. It's the quality of most of your weekends for the next two or three years we're talking about.

BUYING MAIL ORDER

Three reasons to buy mail order: because it's cheap; because a mail order retailer has what you want in stock; and there's no sales tax (if you buy it from out of your own state). Hey, those are all darn good reasons, and I can't fault anybody for taking advantage of them (especially because I buy for those reasons).

I do not make moral judgements very often. I'm a live-and-let-live sort of guy. To each his own. I'm a cultural relativist. Whatever floats your boat. But there are eight deadly sins spoken about in the Good Book, including murder and gluttonly and stuff like that. One of these is trying it on for size in your neighborhood specialty store and then buying it mail order. I put a curse on you if you do that. There's a special circle in hell for you, which Dante wrote about. Circle six or seven I think.

Due to various newer translations your Good Book might only list seven deadly sins and, yes, the eighth I speak of above may only be apocryphal. But do you really want to take that chance? Look, if you're going to use the services of a specialty store for advice, product inspection and sizing, have the good graces to spend the extra ten-bucks and buy it there.

On the other hand, there are some specialty stores which don't offer service even equivalent to a mail order establishment. I might get better wetsuit sizing and product information over the phone from Mission Bay Multisport or Inside Out Sports than from a neighborhood specialty store. I might get better expertise on wheels from Bicycle Sports in Shreveport than from my local store. In that case, there is no moral justification for giving service to the local shop just because it's the local shop.

Realize, though, that there are also good and bad mail order experiences to be had, and the best way to innoculate yourself from a bad experience is to follow the lead of those who've gone before you. One place you can go for such information is our own Slowtwitch Dealer Survey.

GUARANTEES AND WARRANTIES

How important is this? It depends entirely on what value you ascribe to these assets. First, I wouldn't recommend buying a bike unless the shop is willing to give you a credit -- or perhaps even a refund -- within the first 30-days of bike ownership. Even better is if the manufacturer also offers it. I always offered that when I was running Quintana Roo. We'd gladly give the retailer his money back if our customer couldn't be made happy. If the retailer doesn't happily, eagerly, announce that yes, this is his policy, I'd go elsewhere.

As for warranties, this is simple. If this is an important thing to you, buy a Trek or a Cannondale. These are the two champions of warranty service. I'd have to say Trek is perhaps number-one. It is the Nordstroms of service. Trek gets it. Trek doesn't deliver honest, reasonable service. It delivers over-the-top service. No grousing. No complaining. It just makes the customer happy.

I've always tried to deliver over-the-top service when I was running bike companies, and it just isn't that hard to do. In fact, it is a great, and cheap, advertisement. Not only is the word-of-mouth phenomenal, but you cut the feet right out from under your competitors. We always offered a 14-day money back guarantee on our wetsuits. We offered a 2-year no-fault warranty on them as well. Anything happened to the wetsuit within 2-years, we'd fix or replace it. No questions asked.

Funny story about that, we got sent a wetsuit back by a customer's wife. He'd returned from a race, and she'd mistakenly thrown it into the high-heat cycle. A ball of plastic came out, and that's what she sent back. We sent her out a new suit in return, no charge. We had no idea who the customer was. Nine-years later that man -- her husband -- became a several-hundred-thousand dollars-per-year sponsor of our triathlon series.

My advice? Don't settle for less than over-the-top service, from both the shop and the manufacturer. A small bike company may not be able to match everything Trek can offer, but make sure the earnestness to please the customer is there.

WHY BIKE-INDUSTRY ACUMEN IS IN SHORT SUPPLY

In conclusion, I'd like to touch on the subject of why it is so hard to find knowledgeable bike retailers who stock products and can perform sales and service promptly and efficiently. It is because cycling is sexy.

Let's face it, there are two things you like to do: ride and eat. I challenge you to tell me that at some point in your recent life you haven't thought of how successful you'd be as an owner of either a bike shop or a restaurant. You are probably smart enough, though, to resist the temptation to turn your avocation into a vocation. Others aren't that smart (me, for example).

When a lot of people get into an industry because it's fun, more of them are willing to do it for less money. That drives the prices down, and the profits down as well. It drives the smart people away, and cripples the industry. Natural selection often runs in reverse in the bike business. What sorts of industries don't have this problem? Unsexy ones. I'll give you an example.

I have an idea for an invention. I call it the Stealth Urinal. Say, for example, you're in a movie theater and the 32-ounce Diet Pepsi kicks in right as really cool explosions and car chases are about to take place. You get up out of your seat and race to the john. You find that regardless of how and where you aim you're subjected to friendly fire. Enter the Stealth Urinal.

This requires a basic explanation of stealth technology. Among other technological aspects, one reason why it is hard to see the F-117 with radar is because when you shoot a radar pulse at the thing its surfaces are angled such that the beam bounces somewhere else, i.e., not directly back.

In the same way, you build your urinal with angular surfaces that redirect incoming fire away from the sending unit. Of course you've got to have some fairly substantial ailerons on each the side of the Stealth Urinal so as not to cause collateral damage (i.e., innocent civilians to the left and right of you).

The Stealth Urinal is a product of military research and development -- an example of the peace dividend. The cycling world has often taken advantage of such military windfalls. Ironically, though, the Stealth Urinal could actually benefit from strategies developed by the cycling industry. One could surface the Stealth Urinal with fakey carbon weave decals that often appear on cheap and mid-range bicycle components, to make it look like you're actually utilizing a high-tech piece of equipment.

I've even got the marketing scheme figured out. "Stealth Urinal: le pisse de la resistance!"

I'm quite sure I'd get rich off this. I'd soon go public with my private invention, or I'd get bought out by Swisher. I'd own my own pro basketball team.

But that's just a pipe dream. None of that will happen. Why? Because I'm not interested in the evacuation industry. I'd rather stay poor and work with bikes. Just like half the bike shops in America.

What is the moral of this story? Choose wisely where to buy your bike equipment, and opt for the 20-ouncer, even though it's only 25-cents cheaper than the 32-ouncer for which they charge $3.50.